Study finds iPhone 5 costs only 41 cents per year to charge, 3 cents more than iPhone 4

One of the standout features of Apple's new iPhone 5 is its long battery life which, despite cramming in a faster processor, LTE wireless capabilities and a larger screen, performs on par with its predecessors and has been found to cost only three cents more to charge per year.

A test from Opower (viaCNET) found that it costs an estimated 41 cents per year to keep Apple's new iPhone 5 charged, a three cent bump from the legacy iPhone 4. Estimations were based on a once-a-day charging schedule.

Source: Opower

The numbers are to be expected as the iPhone 5's 3.8V, 5.45WH battery holds only slightly more juice than the 3.7V, 5.3Wh found in the iPhone 4S. In comparison to the third-generation iPad, however, the yearly cost to charge the new iPhone is less than one third the price.

One interesting statistic puts the electricity used by all 170 million iPhone 5s expected to be sold over the next 12 months as enough to power all the homes in Cedar Rapids, IA for one year.

Going further, the iPhone 5's yearly charge cost is 12 cents under the 53 cents it takes to charge the competing Samsung Galaxy S III smartphone. That device has a huge 2,100mAh battery, most likely needed to power the unit's massive 4.8-inch display.

"The paramount point here though is not the difference between the two phones," Opower writes, "but rather their striking similarity: the energy consumption of a modern smartphone is minuscule."

According to Opower, the use of smartphones and tablets as replacements for computers can contribute to drastic energy savings.

"Put simply, a day spent web-surfing and facebooking on a smartphone or tablet is a much more energy-efficient day than doing the same on a traditional computer."

Call me crazy, but I thought the most interesting cost segment of the iPhone (and all of the other smartphones for that matter) was not the electricity, but the ~$1000/year in cellular charges. Compared to that, even running my G5 Quad 24x7 was cheap.

One of the standout features of Apple's new iPhone 5 is its long battery life which, despite cramming in a faster processor, LTE wireless capabilities and a larger screen, performs on par with its predecessors and has been found to cost only three cents more to charge per year.
A test from Opower (viaCNET) found that it costs an estimated 41 cents per year to keep Apple's new iPhone 5 charged, a three cent bump from the legacy iPhone 4. Estimations were based on a once-a-day charging schedule."

The numbers are incorrect. They way they determined them was to find out how long it took to charge an iPhone and how much power it drew when being charged and multiplied. Using that calculation assumes:
1. You unplug the phone in the instant that it's fully charged.
2. The charger does not use any power after the phone is charged or after the phone is unplugged.

So unless you unplug the charger from the wall the instant the phone is charged, their numbers are too low.

Of course, it's not a big deal - even if the charger were running at full power constantly, it would only be a few dollars a year. But when you multiply the total by 100 M phones, the difference starts to become significant.

"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"Gatorguy 5/31/13

First the maps fiasco, now this! Millions of users were left disoriented because of the worthless maps app, and now you're telling me the iPhone 5 costs $.03, count 'em $.03 more to charge--per year!! I am outraged that Apple has gotten so big that they treat their customers like this! I used to love Apple products, but I can't support a company that is so environmentally irresponsible.

I still want Apple to release a mega powerful, Mac Pro, unlike anything ever seen before. To hell with the green people. Just make it so insanely powerful and don't worry about low power usage or any of that other environmental crap that certain crazy people talk about. The Mac Pro is not a device to carry around in your pocket. If somebody can afford a Mac Pro, they can also afford to pay for the electricity that a super powerful machine would use. I don't care if it's 24 core and uses 1000 watts.

Apple has been doing mighty fine in the mobile world lately, but I'd like to see them up the ante when it comes to their pro customers also, customers whose main priority is performance and power.

One of the standout features of Apple's new iPhone 5 is its long battery life which, despite cramming in a faster processor, LTE wireless capabilities and a larger screen, performs on par with its predecessors and has been found to cost only three cents more to charge per year.
A test from Opower (viaCNET) found that it costs an estimated 41 cents per year to keep Apple's new iPhone 5 charged, a three cent bump from the legacy iPhone 4. Estimations were based on a once-a-day charging schedule."

The numbers are incorrect. They way they determined them was to find out how long it took to charge an iPhone and how much power it drew when being charged and multiplied. Using that calculation assumes:
1. You unplug the phone in the instant that it's fully charged.
2. The charger does not use any power after the phone is charged or after the phone is unplugged.

So unless you unplug the charger from the wall the instant the phone is charged, their numbers are too low.

Of course, it's not a big deal - even if the charger were running at full power constantly, it would only be a few dollars a year. But when you multiply the total by 100 M phones, the difference starts to become significant.

Additionally it appears to assume arbitrarily that the battery is completely discharged each day, so all they are really comparing is battery capacity.

First the maps fiasco, now this! Millions of users were left disoriented because of the worthless maps app, and now you're telling me the iPhone 5 costs $.03, count 'em $.03 more to charge--per year!! I am outraged that Apple has gotten so big that they treat their customers like this! I used to love Apple products, but I can't support a company that is so environmentally irresponsible.

You forgot to mention that you own 27 Apple products and that Steve Jobs would never have allowed this.

"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"Gatorguy 5/31/13

I still want Apple to release a mega powerful, Mac Pro, unlike anything ever seen before. To hell with the green people. Just make it so insanely powerful and don't worry about low power usage or any of that other environmental crap that certain crazy people talk about. The Mac Pro is not a device to carry around in your pocket. If somebody can afford a Mac Pro, they can also afford to pay for the electricity that a super powerful machine would use. I don't care if it's 24 core and uses 1000 watts.

Apple has been doing mighty fine in the mobile world lately, but I'd like to see them up the ante when it comes to their pro customers also, customers whose main priority is performance and power.

Instead of datacenter, Apple is building a power plant in NC to power only the new Mac Pros used by the US users (Tough luck Canada). Somehow they'll do it. It's Apple.

The numbers are incorrect. They way they determined them was to find out how long it took to charge an iPhone and how much power it drew when being charged and multiplied. Using that calculation assumes:
1. You unplug the phone in the instant that it's fully charged.
2. The charger does not use any power after the phone is charged or after the phone is unplugged.
So unless you unplug the charger from the wall the instant the phone is charged, their numbers are too low.
Of course, it's not a big deal - even if the charger were running at full power constantly, it would only be a few dollars a year. But when you multiply the total by 100 M phones, the difference starts to become significant.

But the iPhone will not consume any additional power by being plugged in vs being on battery (I'm not an expert, but I'd believe its even more efficient to be plugged in).

For example, today I left my phone pluggedin till 10, and still have 52% battery life left.
So it doesn't really matter if your phone is on. 24/7.

I actually do unplug my charger 9 out of 10 days. But I imagine most people don't, so that is a very correct statement.

Call me crazy, but I thought the most interesting cost segment of the iPhone (and all of the other smartphones for that matter) was not the electricity, but the ~$1000/year in cellular charges. Compared to that, even running my G5 Quad 24x7 was cheap.

The numbers are incorrect. They way they determined them was to find out how long it took to charge an iPhone and how much power it drew when being charged and multiplied. Using that calculation assumes:
1. You unplug the phone in the instant that it's fully charged.
2. The charger does not use any power after the phone is charged or after the phone is unplugged.
So unless you unplug the charger from the wall the instant the phone is charged, their numbers are too low.
Of course, it's not a big deal - even if the charger were running at full power constantly, it would only be a few dollars a year. But when you multiply the total by 100 M phones, the difference starts to become significant.

I agree, their numbers are certainly incorrect because the study is overly simplistic. A couple extra things:

1) Recent Apple designed AC chargers draw almost no current unless they're actively charging a device—unplugging them is not necessary. (But most other wall-wart style chargers, including my toothbrush charger draw close to full power all the time.)

2) The electricity actually used by phones (and portable devices in general) has no impact on anyone, or the world. Anyone wishing to save electricity should dry their clothes on a line!

Inductive charging wastes a much larger percentage of the charging current than a direct connection. Inductive only charging (no plug option) would make it impossible to charge your iPhone from a small solar cell, crank charger, or small battery pack. I have a solar/crank LED camping lantern which charges my iPhone 4 very well (albeit slowly). Inductive only charging would waste enough power to prevent these solutions from working.

Inductive only charging would not work from a computer USB port either. Computer USB ports output just barely enough wattage to charge well with a direct connection.

But the iPhone will not consume any additional power by being plugged in vs being on battery (I'm not an expert, but I'd believe its even more efficient to be plugged in).
For example, today I left my phone pluggedin till 10, and still have 52% battery life left.
So it doesn't really matter if your phone is on. 24/7.

The phone won't consume any additional power when it's plugged in compared to being on battery, but the charger is not 100% efficient and draws power even when not actively charging. Although the Apple charger is more efficient than most, it still draws some power.

The article assumes that you fully charge the phone and then unplug both the phone and charger, then discharge the phone 100%. That will draw more power than either leaving the phone plugged in all the time or unplugging the phone and leaving the charger in the wall jack (which is what most people do).

"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"Gatorguy 5/31/13

Inductive charging wastes a much larger percentage of the charging current than a direct connection. Inductive only charging (no plug option) would make it impossible to charge your iPhone from a small solar cell, crank charger, or small battery pack. I have a solar/crank LED camping lantern which charges my iPhone 4 very well (albeit slowly). Inductive only charging would waste enough power to prevent these solutions from working.

Inductive only charging would not work from a computer USB port either. Computer USB ports output just barely enough wattage to charge well with a direct connection.

Watch out. Greanpeace will protest companies who make clothes dryers, and they too will be "forced" to mow down thousands of acres of land for solar and wind farms as well.

Long battery life my butt. I love my new iPhone 5, but it definitely is a power hog compared to my iPhone 4. It might not be different from the 4S, but everyone I know with an "S" complains about how often they need to charge it. Don't try using GPS without a car charger, or using apps/internet at full screen brightness for more than 90 minutes....let's jsut sya that.

I can only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look good either.

Use iPhone Regularly

For proper maintenance of a lithium-based battery, it’s important to keep the electrons in it moving occasionally. Be sure to go through at least one charge cycle per month (charging the battery to 100% and then completely running it down).

I do at minimum one a day. Of course it is a 2 year old iPhone4 but still. It is like they want you to barely use the features of the phone to achieve decent battery life.

Of course my wife uses her phone (same phone as mine) about twice as much as me. It is a wonder it holds any charge at all, but it still keeps on truckin', cracked screen and all!

Question to those of you who have upgraded to iPhone 5 - Can you set it to use 3G data? If so does your battery life improve much?

Use iPhone Regularly

For proper maintenance of a lithium-based battery, it’s important to keep the electrons in it moving occasionally. Be sure to go through at least one charge cycle per month (charging the battery to 100% and then completely running it down).

I do at minimum one a day. Of course it is a 2 year old iPhone4 but still. It is like they want you to barely use the features of the phone to achieve decent battery life.

Of course my wife uses her phone (same phone as mine) about twice as much as me. It is a wonder it holds any charge at all, but it still keeps on truckin', cracked screen and all!

Question to those of you who have upgraded to iPhone 5 - Can you set it to use 3G data? If so does your battery life improve much?

Not sure I understand your point. They are advising users to go through at least one full charge cycle per month (~0% - 100%). Many people charge their phone every day even if the battery has not drained fully, either through lighter use or because they keep it plugged in for extended periods. They are not suggesting that you should only need one such charge cycle per month.

How soon can an iPad replace my desktop computer that edits basic movies, creates and edits presentations, and plays streaming music while doing everything? I would like to save plenty of electricity in my daily computing activities. My desktop uses about 300 watts and my laptop uses 85 watts. In addition to that I have two external monitors.

In the winter months the extra energy used by the computers doesn't matter much because that wasted heat helps to keep the room warm. It has a use. That means that the extra energy used by these larger machines is only wasted at times when the additional heat isn't useful.

It would be good to save over 60% of the electricity used on computing. That would make off the grid living easier.

Use iPhone Regularly

For proper maintenance of a lithium-based battery, it’s important to keep the electrons in it moving occasionally. Be sure to go through at least one charge cycle per month (charging the battery to 100% and then completely running it down).

I do at minimum one a day. Of course it is a 2 year old iPhone4 but still. It is like they want you to barely use the features of the phone to achieve decent battery life.

Of course my wife uses her phone (same phone as mine) about twice as much as me. It is a wonder it holds any charge at all, but it still keeps on truckin', cracked screen and all!

Question to those of you who have upgraded to iPhone 5 - Can you set it to use 3G data? If so does your battery life improve much?

Never used any of the recommendations from Apple on my old iPhone 3GS that now my wife uses. Its battery is working perfectly. It uses all the push notifications and the brightness is as it was on day one. My wife charges the iPhone once a day even that the battery is 50-70% full before charge.